Packard Forum Index » General

Hello all!

Okay, so I am going to provoke everyone who is reading this:

I've started up my car restoration business and am calling it "Penobscot Packards".

Questions:
Am I allowed to use the name "Packards" in my little biz?
For that matter, may I use one of the older logos as well?

I think I may not be able to do either legally. What's YOUR take on this topic?

Ralph

My 2-cents worth.

Of course you can use the word Packards, just not in the script form that is a registered trademark. You can only the script form or any of the other trademark-protected logos or images with permission of the holder of the rights.

PAC (aka - "The Packard Club") lays claim to some Packard trademarks, while the (new) Packard Motor Car Company, which never really got off the ground, has laid claim to others.

I'm no lawyer, but do not believe that anyone can simply trademark a word that's been in common usage - even a family surname. To qualify as a trademark, such a word had to be part of some artwork/logo and/or of a particular typeface - something unique. Also, the trademark registration must be for a specific market/use.

For example, take a look at my post (#3) in another thread. The only thing I could find on PAC's trademark registration was for the word "PACKARD" (in a specific style, but NOT the script) and used for clothing. That's the only registration I could find ONLINE for that club.

I couldn't find any trademark registration information, online, for the new PMCC (of AZ), but the available P/R indicates that Roy Gullickson, its owner, purchased those rights from C. Budd Bayliff, owner of Bayliff Coach Corp. (of Lima, OH). The Packard Motor Car Company homepage indicates that their registration is for the manufacture and marketing of automobiles and parts. The new PMCC, the one prototype, and trademark rights have been posted for sale more than once, but with no takers.

You can draw your own conclusions from this, but I feel that a more extensive search and inspection of registrations with the US Patents and Trademarks Office would be needed to see just what can and cannot be done.

Let us know what you find.

Pick up anything related to classic cars and you can see that whoever holds rights to Packard and the Packard logo does not unreasonably withhold usage to anyone in the hobby. Copyright infringements such as Kanter's copying the style and modification of the Packard logo is not been challenged, as it would if held by a business as opposed to an associated non-profit club. We don't need battles like that. The Packard script (with an "s") is used by Packards International, too, with impunity. So I'd contact PAC and PMCC and notify them that you want to use the Packard logo in association with restoring and even selling Packards. I don't think you'd have any problem with the way you are using the name. But I'm not a lawyer and I don't even play on on TV.

I would like to know if anyone has been refused usage. What are the criteria for refusal. I think what we want to avoid is some copyright attorney buying it and making all of us in the hobby pay to use it. As it stands, if it were Packard related, I don't think usage would be refused or there might be a stink. It's good that some of the trademarks of the company are in the hands of non-profit clubs.

My 4 cents...

Copyright infringements such as Kanter's copying the style and modification of the Packard logo is not been challenged

Joe, I beg to differ. Gullickson challenged Kanters, Max as well as I remember, PAC, and others. It was a very nasty episode that was perhaps a significant factor in stifling interest in his venture. You may recall that Gullickson did not exhibit the "new" Packard at the Centennial, but rather in a museum in Cleveland; that's an indicator of the tensions at the time due to trademark issues.

That's precisely what I referenced.

When hobby trademarks fall into the hands of a business, lawyers from This is Mine and That is Yours get involved. Most of the Packard trademarks are in the hands of PAC, and that's good. Members influence decisions about usage. I would like to know who has been refused by PAC to use trademarks held by the club. What are the criteria for denial.

I've named companies and designed corporate identity, but all too often we see "loving hands at home" logos copying trademarks of establish businesses because they are too lazy to come up with something original. The original businesses have built equity in the name and look. That's what newcomers are trying to leverage. It's theft. When someone infringes on that, they should be denied.

We were all just a little too sleepy on the PMCC deal. In a club, your word is your bond. Your credibility is your stock in trade. There's even a fair amount of transparency. But copyrights expire. Lack of usage weakens claims. When that does happen, we hope for benevolence, not problems. Usage, those ads by PMCC, strengthen its claim. Even if they don't have a car to sell. It would be a magnanimous gesture for PMCC to offer those rights to PI or PAC in exchange for some costs, granted licensing solely for itself, and restrictive non-profit use only for others. It would mean a huge amount of goodwill for PMCC.

I would have to love Packard even more than I do to want to invest in resurrecting it and trying to design a modern automobile befitting the name and reputation. That soured somehow. Did Packard owners have a part in that? I don't know, but gee, when I read critical remarks about The Request, I can see how opinion can shape perceptions. Maybe PMCC experienced that. We're all automobile designers. The running board side moldings I bought from Gullickson were expensive, but high quality. There are vendors who re-manufacture Packard parts that, in my opinion, fall a ways short of Packard quality, authenticity, design and manufacture of the original part. The moldings I bought look beautiful on the car. It's too bad we have to fight over something we all care about. Too bad the wisdom of Solomon isn't available in these divisive times.

I can't remember the name of the comic who did the routine about trying to save someone who intended to commit suicide by jumping off a bridge. He tried to save him by pointing out all the things they had in common, which gradually got down to the fact that they were from the same town and both members of the same religion, however, once the rescuer discovered that the jumper was from the church on the west side of town instead of the east side of town, he said, "Die heretic!"

I defer to Cardinal Santana and O_D above, but so far as the proper noun usage, it helps keep a fine name and part of national, even world, business history alive. An homage by any other name. Let's see. Used to buy parts decades ago from the wonderful Roland M. Crawford's Packard Parts Unlimited, in Groveland, MA. Purchased a fine, complete, authentic wire harness from Potomac Packard, Falls Church, VA. And my auld friends Steve Messenger and Don Figone started ages ago the stellar Just Packards, Napa, CA, specializing in late '30s and '40s Packard repair, service, resurrection.

This is a questionable area to me. I can see using the word Packard in a descriptive sense, like "Truckmen's Packard Service". Something that did not imply that you were affiliated with the Packard company. It is very easy to cross over into the questionable or sleazy. Like the old "Factory Air Conditioner Company" so named so that crooked used car lots could install their product and advertise "Factory Air Conditioner".

su8overdrive, your post brought back some fond memories of Packard parts for my 34 purchased from Roland Crawford up in Groveland!! One of the first to offer Packard parts on a broad scale. I remember the story of Bob Skop who went up to Groveland to find the unfindable, a division window crank for some custom-bodied town car - he'd searched unsuccessfully for years for it. When he asked Roland, he opened a drawer that had about 100 of them in it and said, "you mean these?"

Joe Santana:

I am sure there were other comedians that did the routine, but the only time I ever saw it was on the comedy channel and it was done by a rather unique looking comedian named Emo Phillips. LMAO.

ALK